The majority of South Carolina Episcopalians who attended a special convention at St. Philip’s Church here Nov. 17 affirmed actions by Bishop Mark Lawrence and the diocesan Standing Committee a month ago to disaffiliate the diocese from the Episcopal Church.

Those actions took place after Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori restricted Lawrence’s ministry on Oct. 17 after the church’s Disciplinary Board for Bishops certified to her that he had abandoned the Episcopal Church “by an open renunciation of the discipline of the church.”

On that same day, the Standing Committee announced that the action of the Disciplinary Board “triggered two pre-existing corporate resolutions of the diocese, which simultaneously disaffiliated the diocese from the Episcopal Church and called a special convention.”

The bishop referred to the special convention as “the Valley of Decision” during his address and asserted, “It is time to turn the page.” He referred to attempts to prevent separation of the diocese, and his oft-mentioned issues of theology, morality and disagreement with church canons…

The full text of Bishop Lawrence’s address to the convention can be found here. It is worth reading in full.

The ENS report notes that:

..While the bishop referred to numerous letters of support from church leaders, he did not announce any open offers of affiliation with the Anglican Communion, and he confirmed that for now the separatist diocese will affiliate with no one. In a conference call following the convention, he confirmed that alignment is not on the table at present.

However, during his address, he claimed that “for now and the foreseeable future, having withdrawn from our association with TEC, we remain an extra-provincial diocese within the larger Anglican Communion.”

Such a designation requires action by the Anglican Consultative Council, which concluded a 12-day meeting in Auckland, New Zealand, on Nov. 7. No action on South Carolina was taken during that meeting and the council will not meet again until May 2016…

Today, Saturday, November 17, 2012, the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of South Carolina met in Special Convention at the “mother church of the Diocese,” historic St. Philip’s Church in Charleston. There, an overwhelming majority passed three resolutions…

Did they even have a quorum in the lay order? Compare this report of the Nov. 17 proceedings: The final vote, which was by orders, was for approval of amendments to the diocesan canons, likewise removing all such reference to TEC. It passed with an overwhelming vote of 96% (71 clergy) in the clergy order, with 3 abstaining. In the lay order, the vote passed with 90% in favor (47 yes with 5 abstentions). with this minute from the Journal of the 221st annual meeting of the diocese, held in March 2012: The Rev. Tyler Prescott reported that there were… Read more »

Reply

Martin Reynolds

7 years ago

Very sad. It was indeed worth reading the full statement from Lawrence. On other threads it has been asserted that TEC will baulk at the prospect of challenging such great a larceny, overwhelmed by the sheer numbers and audacity of the thieves and cost of reclaiming the property. It brings to mind the parable of the wicked husbandmen. I was once burgled four times in six months, and there surely is a point at which the wrongdoing weighs so heavily that you feel like opening your door and walking away. But let us hope that on this case TEC takes… Read more »

Ever since the episcopal ordination of Mark Lawrence there were suspicions of his motivation in taking over the Diocese of South Carolina. Despite promises that he would not seek to take the diocese out of the Episcopal Church, those movements ‘behind the scenes’ that were made to secure property rights for the Standing Committee – away from the National Church – have caused many to wonder when an attempt would be made by the bishop towards a schismatic breakaway from TEC. The behaviour of the bishop and his followers at the latest General Convention, and his subsequent dissociation from the… Read more »

Jeremy
You note that in November “65 parishes and missions were present”. Yesterday, according to ENS there were 54 present, and the total is 78.

So only 11 less yesterday. And I am sure 54 out of 78 is a quorum.

Reply

Jeremy

7 years ago

Martin Reynolds, there are ways to make even litigation over 40 properties efficient and economical when it arises–as it does here–out of the same, common set of facts. In other words, if the vestries of the separatist parishes had acted separately in attempting to take the various properties, then the national church might have to resort to separate litigations. Here, however, the actions at issue form a pattern. And although a lot of people are acting, there is a small group that is most active. Think of it as a wheel, with a hub and spokes. As a result, one… Read more »

Reply

Jeremy

7 years ago

Simon, you are right if a quorum in the lay order is determined by parishes.

I raised the question because it looks as though a lot of lay delegates were absent or did not vote.

Jeremy, I accept that is a dramatic fall in lay attendance. Maybe somebody has more detailed knowledge of the rules that apply here, about being quorate.

Reply

Martin Reynolds

7 years ago

Gosh, Jeremy, it had not occurred to me that RICO might be used in this case. I guess you have could be right and it may in fact apply!

That would be devastating – but as I understand it would defend the assets of the diocese from being further alienated and prevent Lawrence and his allies bankrupting it as they would not be allowed to use diocesan resources to defend their actions.

Reply

Richard Warren

7 years ago

For anyone who was paying attention at the time of Mark Lawrence’s second go around at having his election consented to, it should have been clear that this event was going to happen at some time in the future. He never unequivocally stated that he would not attempt to lead the Diocese of SC out of TEC but rather answered when asked if he would ever do so, remarked in such a way as to give those who wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt the opportunity to do so and then hope that he wouldn’t carry out… Read more »

Reply

Daibhead

7 years ago

Just read through the resolutions from SC, and there is one particularly troubling statement, “we declare that as God has sent Bishop Lawrence to be our bishop, only He [God] has the authority to declare otherwise.” Although God can certainly work through the legislative process in churches, it was the Diocese of SC that chose him as their bishop, which decision was confirmed on the second go around by a majority of Standing Committees and Bishops. It seems to me that they are setting themselves up for trouble if they ever find themselves no longer comfortable under Bishop Lawrence’s leadership!

Reply

Pat O&apos;Neill

7 years ago

Daibhead:

Yes, this sounds disturbingly like “the divine right of kings” for a diocese in the United States to be using, doesn’t it?